That ol’ rag you see littering the streets and garbage bins of Humboldt County is at it again, folks. The NCJ penned a story for their online blog which basically says that a port-a-potty in the Palco March homeless encampment area was torched in protest of the City of Eureka’s notice to vacate the Marsh by May 2nd.

But THC must ask: what if the potty wasn’t torched in protest?What if some people just want to see the potty burn?

THC is disappointed that the NCJ didn’t touch on the elephant in the Marsh in their story. What about the rights of the port-a-potty that was so tragically incinerated? What about the little potty trainers left behind without their quite possibly single-parent mommy or daddy potty who was struggling to get back on their feet? Apparently, bleeding hearts can only stretch so far.

Poor little things can’t even mourn, and they’ll just be shit on for the rest of their lives.

But that’s okay, because according to the City of Eureka, people camping down in the Devil’s Playground won’t be a problem after May 2nd. Meaning that all philosophical questions regarding the existential plight of port-a-potties will soon be moot.

In related and equally shitty news, Eureka put out an RFP today for temporary homeless encampment proposals from outside agencies. Which is great news, in and of itself. The shitty part? The City of Eureka is expecting that all of these proposals will stand alone, without any aid or funding from the City other than their approval of the project.

Here’s a link to the RFP document, in which you can read the details of the proposals that the City is soliciting, and from which you can also deduce what a bunch of feckless pansies are sitting in Eureka’s Council chambers.

Remember the last time the City gave the reigns to an outside organization for establishing a “temporary” tent city to re-home the good people down in the Devil’s Playground? Yeah, it didn’t turn out so well.

And this time around, the City expects an alternative campsite to be established without any funding help, and which completely insulates them from legal responsibility. Way to really put your neck out for the good of the community, Eureka City Council. Bravo.

THC also feels compelled to touch upon the fact that the 6-month time frame stipulated in the City’s RFP is just plain ludicrous. Sure, we don’t want a permanent, full-time homeless encampment like the whiz-kids over at AHHA were pushing for. But does the City think the need for homeless shelter will evaporate after six months?

Probably not, considering that the strategy that the City paid lots of money to a consulting firm for – money that could have been used to support something like a temporary homeless encampment! – pushes for the City and/or County to house 30 people over 60 days. At that rate – and assuming the estimates of 1,300 homeless in Humboldt are accurate – it would take years to house all these folks.

Anyhow, let’s all sit back and watch as the City takes zero initiative, and expects somebody else to do all the heavy lifting again.

8 Responses to New age protest: burn toilets, not bras!

Yes, City paid 85K for FS to say Housing First! only… then issues an RFP for nothing related to Housing First!….. hummm then said city would not provide funding or land, which was contradicted today in news. The city is confused about state and federal laws about evictions and federally funded projects …. they require relocation. If people are housed, relocated or otherwise, they cannoty be evicted in 4-6 months as the city is asking an agency to do. Nor will the feds or state fund such an idea… generaly, permanent site control is a basic requirement (which they define as at least 5 years)… hummmm.. A free county campground would allow people places to go, and then federal funds could be used to maintain and upgrade the facilities. An organization could then get funding… Eureka could do the same with all city owned open space…. A future site of an affordable housing project could be used during the 3 years it takes to fund and develop… All these are solutions used elswhere, easy to do if there is political will. Instead the city is doing EXCATLY what the consultants and Housing First! said DO NOT DO!… i.e. using the police as socialworkers, and allowing emergency services to care for the indigent.. at extra ordinary cost… The city rejected AHHAs offer, at about 65K – Less than the consultants were paid, to essentially volunteer to help while creating a reasonable standard of care… address, showers, bathrooms – all essential in getting folk off the streets and back into better condition… a Housing First! mantra … house folk 1st, then solve the other problems. Due to the lack of actual housing , they next best thing is needed… a permanent location for folk so all other things can occur.. jobs, social services, safe, warm and dry. The city staff and some CC can’t get there from here and predictably the trail project (5 million for walking not a penny for a home) will be postponed or cancelled… if the lenders decide Eureka is in fact violating CA’s relocation laws… Meanwhile the police are left to lterally shovel the sh*t… something no one wants them to do except the CC folk and staff that cannot seem to impliment the Mayor’s request.

Good news? Non strings attached way to help.
Bad news? Ridiculous deadline, probably red tape, and time restriction.
It’s set up to fail. The reasons why are of a speculative nature only at this point. I speculate it’s to have zero campsite at all, so the BOS qualify for the larger emergency funding with even tighter strings attached. But, who knows. Maybe the BOS hit the pause button long enough to hopefully get the unfortunate set up somewhere, anywhere, so they can avoid the strings attached to “global neighborhoods” treaties.
Maybe both. The pathway seems to be of great importance. Is it on a grant? Strings strings everywhere, but it’s not confetti.